Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 1229–1236 | Cite as

Pesticide removal from waste spray-tank water by organoclay adsorption after field application: an approach for a formulation of cyprodinil containing antifoaming/defoaming agents

  • Nicoleta A. SuciuEmail author
  • Tommaso Ferrari
  • Federico Ferrari
  • Marco Trevisan
  • Ettore Capri
Research Article



Many reports on purification of water containing pesticides are based on studies using unformulated active ingredients. However, most commercial formulations contain additives/adjuvants or are manufactured using microencapsulation which may influence the purification process. Therefore, the main objective of this work was to develop and test a pilot scheme for decontaminating water containing pesticides formulated with antifoaming/defoaming agents.


The Freundlich adsorption coefficients of formulation of cyprodinil, a new-generation fungicide, onto the organoclay Cloisite 20A have been determined in the laboratory in order to predict the efficiency of this organoclay in removing the fungicide from waste spray-tank water. Subsequently, the adsorption tests were repeated in the pilot system in order to test the practical operation of the purification scheme.


The laboratory adsorption tests successfully predicted the efficiency of the pilot purification system, which removed more than 96% cyprodinil over a few hours. The passing of the organoclay–cyprodinil suspension through a layer of biomass gave 100% recovery of the organoclay at the surface of the biomass after 1 week. The organoclay was composted after the treatment to try to break down the fungicide so as to allow safe disposal of the waste, but cyprodinil was not significantly dissipated after 90 days.


The purification scheme proved to be efficient for decontaminating water containing cyprodinil formulated with antifoaming/defoaming agents, but additional treatments for the adsorbed residues still appear to be necessary even for a moderately persistent pesticide such as cyprodinil. Furthermore, a significant conclusion of this study concerns the high influence of pesticide formulations on the process of purification of water containing these compounds, which should be taken into account when developing innovative decontamination schemes, especially for practical applications.


Cyprodinil Antifoaming/defoaming agents Purification Wastewater Modified clays 


  1. Abbate C, Arena M, Baglieri A, Gennari M (2008) Effects of organoclays on soil eubacterial community assessed by molecular approaches. J Hazard Mater 168:466–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bremner JM, Mulvaney CS (1982) Nitrogen-total. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties, ASA and SSSA, Agronomy Monograph No. 9, Madison, WI, pp 595–624Google Scholar
  3. Carter AD (2000) How pesticides get into water—and proposed reduction measures. Pesticide Outlook 11(4):149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. CNR-IRSA (1994) Analytical methods for waters. Book 100 (Roma) (in Italian)Google Scholar
  5. Code of Federal Regulation Title 21 (21 CFR176 210) (2010) Food and drugs, Sec 176.210 - Defoaming agents used in the manufacture of paper and paperboard. http://www.accessdata. = 176.210. Accessed 14 July 2011
  6. Coppola L, Castillo MP, Vischetti C (2010) Degradation of isoproturon and bentazone in peat- and compost-based biomixtures. Pest Manag Sci 67:107–113. doi: 10.1002/ps.2040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Wilde T, Spanoghe P, Mertens J, Sniegowksi K, Ryckeboer J, Jaeken P, Springael D (2009) Characterizing pesticide sorption and degradation in macro scale biopurification systems using column displacement experiments. Environ Pollut 157:1373–1381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Wilde T, Capri E, Husby J, Castillo MP, Karpouzas D, Nilsson E, Spliid NH (2010) 3rd European Biobed Workshop. Environ Sci Pollut Res. doi: 10.1007/s11356-010-0407-y
  9. Fait G, Nicelli M, Fragoulis G, Trevisan M, Capri E (2007) Reduction of point contamination sources of pesticide from a vineyard farm. Environ Sci Technol 41:3302–3308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Giles CH, McEvans TH, Nakhwa SN, Smith D (1960) Studies in adsorption. Part XI. A system of classification of adsorption isotherms and its use in diagnosis of desorption mechanism and measurement of specific surface areas of solids. J Chem Soc 3:3973–3993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Green JM, Beestman GB (2007) Recently patented and commercialized formulation and adjuvant technology. Crop Prot 26:320–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Karanasios E, Tsiropoulos NG, Karpouzas DG, Menkissoglu-Spiroudi U (2010) Novel biomixtures based on local Mediterranean lignocellulosic materials: evaluation for use in biobed systems. Chemosphere 80:914–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kreuger J, Nilsson E (2001) Catchment scale risk-mitigation experiences—key issues for reducing pesticide transport to surface waters. In: BCPC Conference. Pesticide Behaviour in Soil and Water 78:319–324Google Scholar
  14. Krogh KA, Halling-Sorensen B, Mogensen BB, Vejrup KV (2003) Environmental properties and effects of nonionic surfactant adjuvants in pesticides: a review. Chemosphere 50:871–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lombardy Region (2002) Recommended methods for microbiological analysis of food. Italy, pp 19–21 (in Italian)Google Scholar
  16. Mason PJ, Foster IDL, Carter AD, Walker A, Higginbotham S, Jones RL, Hardy IAJ (1999) Relative importance of point source contamination of surface waters: River Cherwell a catchment monitoring study. Proceedings XI Symposium on Pesticide Chemistry, 11–15 September, Cremona, Italy.Google Scholar
  17. Monaci E, Coppola L, Casucci C, Perucci P, Vischetti C (2009) Retention capacity of an organic bio-mixture against different mixtures of fungicides used in vineyards. J Environ Sci Health B 44:724–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Bigham JM (ed) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3. Chemical and Microbiological Properties, ASA, CSSA, SAAJ, Madison, WI, pp 961–1010Google Scholar
  19. Reeves BG (1992) The rationale for adjuvant use with agrochemicals. In: Foy CL (ed) Adjuvants for agrochemicals. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 487–488Google Scholar
  20. Rodriguez-Cruz MS, Andrades MS, Sanchez-Martin MJ (2008) Significance of the long-chain organic cation structure in the sorption of the penconazole and metalaxyl fungicides by organo clays. J Hazard Mater 160:200–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Suciu NA, Capri E (2009) Adsorption of chlorpyrifos, penconazole and metalaxyl from aqueous solution by modified clays. J Environ Sci Health B 44:525–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Suciu NA, Ferrari T, Ferrari F, Trevisan M, Capri E (2011) Pesticide removal from waste spray-tank water by organoclay adsorption after field application to vineyards. Environ Sci Pollut Res. doi: 10.1007/s11356-011-0494-4
  23. Undabeytia T, Nir S, Rubin B (2000) Organo-clay formulations of the hydrophobic herbicide norflurazon yield reduced leaching. J Agric Food Chem 48:4767–4773CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicoleta A. Suciu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tommaso Ferrari
    • 2
  • Federico Ferrari
    • 2
  • Marco Trevisan
    • 1
  • Ettore Capri
    • 1
  1. 1.Istituto di Chimica Agraria ed AmbientaleUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuorePiacenzaItaly
  2. 2.AEIFORIA srlPiacenzaItaly

Personalised recommendations